One Year Down…

How do you like the shirt I got for Christmas?

Well! It’s been a year, hasn’t it?

We started with DOGE, and Liberation Day, and tariffs that were on and then off and then on and then off. We did not start with the Day One promises to end the war in Ukraine, nor the war in Gaza, nor to reduce the price of groceries and the cost of living. We have moved on to the Department of War attacking boats in the Caribbean without any evidence (so far as we know) that they even have drugs; certainly there is no evidence that they are “narco-terrorists,” as they are not, even if they are transporting narcotics, as they are not people who are using unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. And, if they are transporting narcotics, they are not moving fentanyl to the US, as fentanyl comes from China through Mexico, and not through Venezuela; if they are moving drugs (and there is no evidence that has been presented which says that they are, which means, according to our own concept of justice, that they are innocent, not having been proven guilty) then they are sending cocaine to Europe. Not great, but not the justification used for their slaughter: and there is, of course, no justification for the order to kill two men on a sinking shipwreck, which was an illegal order that the military followed – even though when our elected Congresspeople made a public service announcement to encourage the military not to follow unlawful orders, the administration freaked the fuck out and acted like that was sedition: entirely ignoring the clearly unlawful order that had been issued, and followed. Now the man who followed the order is doing fine, and the man (one of them) who reminded him to follow his oath is being stripped of his rank and pension.

Hegseth is scrutinized by Congress over boat strikes | AP News
These guys say that THAT guy shouldn’t have his rank.
Integrity has defined my brother's service to our nation, as a combat  veteran, astronaut, and US Senator. Any effort to undermine that is an  abuse of power.

It has been a fucking year.

A year with a shutdown, and a tax cut for billionaires, and increased health insurance costs for the rest of us. A year of dissent being squashed in clear violation of freedom of speech, with university students being arrested and jailed and deported for their speech, even while the administration promotes the same genocide the students were speaking out against: it’s almost like we have traded the right to speak our minds, for the opportunity to slaughter innocents, and then steal their homeland and make money from it. A year of our National Guard being weaponized against us in order to stop peaceful protests, while actual insurrectionists were pardoned en masse: almost like our right to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances has been traded for the freedom of loyal brownshirts. A year of deportations: starting with sending innocent people, both legal immigrants and US citizens, to torture prisons in El Salvador (along with millions of dollars in recompense for the considerate acquiescence and collaboration of the Salvadoran administration), continuing through shocking raids on homes and assaults on children, finally culminating in the recorded murder of an innocent American citizen, and the subsequent shielding of the murderer by the federal government, which continues to lie and accuse everyone who is not one of their murderous thugs. And again, the administration is cracking down on free speech, sending federal troops, and cruelly assaulting anyone and everyone they can.

It’s been a year, now, that we still have not gotten the Epstein files. Only about 1% has been released, and that 1% includes absurd redactions and previously-released information.

Happy Anniversary, President Trump. One year ago you took the oath of office for a second time: and you immediately set about destroying the country that elected you, in every way that matters: most often to increase your own wealth and power, sometimes for no good reason that I can discern – why, for instance, do you want to remove the ACA? You don’t give a shit; you don’t have that many employees. You do not profit directly from health care costs going up for individual citizens. I recognize that the likely reason is you have some billionaire whispering in your ear, like fucking Wormtongue only slimier, telling you that the ACA is unAmerican and that removing it will make America great again, and just as you expect your followers to do, you are absolutely willing to get on board without a single second of questioning “Wait – why is government-subsidized health care bad?” I also recognize that there is a certain amount of traditional Republican posturing in your political stances as well; like, you also don’t give a shit about abortion, or about gun rights, but your base expects you to remove the one and protect the other, so you do, because you are yourself entirely indifferent to anything that doesn’t affect you directly; and I know that the right hates all things resembling socialized health care (Except for the Medicaid and Medicare that they and their families use; but I’m not going to get into the hypocrisies of Americans: that blade always cuts both ways, and I’m not interested in yet another round of Whataboutism, which is rapidly becoming our national pastime): but why have you decided that this is the thing you’re so set on destroying? Your congressional delegation is clearly not on your side with this one, not all of them; so why didn’t you give up and let people keep their goddamn subsidies, and just take credit for it like you do with everything else? Why do you feel this burning need to destroy people’s lives?

Is it really just because Barack Obama got the ACA passed into law? And you hate him so much, and you are so profoundly jealous of all of the ways that he is better than you (which is, in fact, every single way imaginable except in the Shithead Championships, which you win walking away), that you want to do everything you can to destroy his signature accomplishments? I mean, that would certainly explain you destroying the JCPOA and fucking up our actually effective strategy in Iran, but I assume another benefit there for you is the potential war, which you’d clearly love to have because then you could claim Iran’s oil to go with Venezuela’s; but the ACA and the subsidies that keep people insured have nothing to do with oil. I honestly don’t get it. I get the drug price thing, because you intend to force the drug companies into making sweetheart deals with you so you can sell medications to Americans through your new Trump Rx company; but again, that has nothing to do with insurance or the cost or health care in general.

Mitt Romney And Super PAC Attack Obama's 'Cool' Factor: Will it Work? |  IBTimes
Haters gonna hate, I guess

Are you really just that much of an asshole? Based on how you respond to questions from reporters with insults like “Quiet piggy,” and criticism from random passersby by saying “Fuck you” and flipping them off, it might just be that. But while I can easily accept that you do so much damage to my country and my fellow Americans because you are an evil, greedy fuck, I still struggle with you doing this much harm just because you’re a fucking prick. Maybe in honor of this august occasion, I will make this my gift to you: I will accept that your vile nastiness is on its own enough to explain your actions. Though really, that’s a gift to me. It will make it easier.

Note to self: Shit flinging gibbon.

And I need to make this easier: because the actual task is going to be very, very hard. And the longer we focus on the wrong thing, the more harm will be done, and the harder it will be to solve the problem and complete the actual task that lies before us.

Here’s the truth, which I want to put before you all now, on this anniversary of the second inauguration of this vile warthog of a man: Trump is not the right thing to focus on. He is not the problem. I don’t say that to delegitimize or devalue everything that we have all done to oppose the slimeball: it was necessary, and to some extent it still is. The thing is, Trump could have been the problem, and to some extent he still can be the problem: because it is still possible that Trump could actually destroy this country. He could do it in two ways: he can start a nuclear war, and he can overthrow the legitimate government based on the Constitution and become an actual dictator. The nuclear war option remains, and will for as long as Trump is in power; the best we can hope for there is that his own self-interest will not be served by the death of the planet. We can also hope that the military will not follow an arbitrary and capricious order to launch nuclear death at the world; this hope that the military will not obey Trump’s most deranged and destructive orders is also what we can count on for the second threat, that of a coup and Trump’s elevation to Emperor – and frankly, I had a lot more confidence in that bulwark keeping us safe before Pete Hegseth told soldiers to murder drowning men, and they fucking did it. And then invaded a sovereign nation to kidnap their president. And they’re proud of it. So I dunno any more if this is something we can feel safe and secure about: would the military actually rise up and betray their oaths, and destroy their own way of life, in order to put Trump onto a throne? I really want to say no. But I can’t be sure.

So: Trump is still an existential threat, and so everything we can do to remove him, personally, specifically, from office is a good thing to do. His actions are doing real harm to real people, so everything we can do to oppose the specific actions of this administration are genuinely good things to do, whether the intent is to prevent the harm, ameliorate the harm, or provide a balancing benefit to offset the harm: all good. All righteous, all positive, all beneficial. Keep doing all those things.

But recognize, too, that so long as Trump doesn’t overthrow the government or set the world on fire, he will have to leave office. And we will still have to live in this country that he fucked up. And the real issue, of course, is that Trump isn’t the one who fucked it up: we did. Because we voted him in.

Okay, not “We.” I don’t think the people reading this mostly voted for Trump, and I don’t believe we are all equally to blame for his election, including those who didn’t vote for him. So “They” did vote him in. But we still have to live with them, in the same country; and if we don’t want to make this country an evil, unjust tyranny, we still have to let them vote. That’s the fight. That’s the work we have to do. Healing.

I don’t know how to do it. I think about that a lot: how can we prevent this from happening again? I think about it most often in specific terms of trying to rebuild the international alliances and cooperations that Trump is setting on fire; like, if he really does break NATO by making more and more absurd demands for Greenland or what have you – I will not assume that owning Greenland is the last or the stupidest idea he will have; this is only the FIRST year of FOUR – how could we convince the other members of the treaty organization that, after Trump is gone, we will never allow another piece of shit like him to take over our country and fuck it up the same way?

What laws could we put in place? What safeguards to ensure that this shit won’t happen again? I mean, we can certainly (in theory) pass a law to rescind the Supreme Court’s absurd decision that presidents are not criminally liable for their actions in office; that would require a congress that were not members of a cult, and a President willing to hold himself or herself to an actual moral and ethical standard; but I can imagine that happening. But so long as the President retains the immunity of the office, which I don’t think should or could be removed, we can’t really guarantee our allies (soon to be our former allies) that they can trust this country: this country that was willing to elect this fucking guy.

Trump rewrote foreign policy as president. If he wins in 2024, he wants to  go further : NPR

Twice.

Honestly, I don’t think we can; I don’t think we will ever be able to heal the rift that we are creating, that Trump is creating, right now. Partly because it is our fault, as a nation: we have never actually healed our own racist and biased culture and institutions, and so this could quite easily happen again. It would look different, but to think that there would never be another Republican demagogue who could tap into the resentment on the right, or a liberal demagogue who could create even worse conflict by actually persecuting the right the way they like to pretend they have been persecuted, is to ignore what gave rise to Trump’s initial success. It was not his brilliance. It was not his charisma. It was not Trump at all, though he did bring enough to the table to make it happen. He was the match, and he started the fire: but the fuel was already there, and it will remain after this match is snuffed out.

I think we have made progress, over time, towards healing the wounds that underlie this country’s dysfunctions. I think that because a hundred years ago, I would not have thought I was racist at all, and today I know that I harbor some prejudices, mostly unconscious, and that I once had some quite serious biases. I know that I live a privileged life, largely built on the privilege of my upbringing, which was at least partly due to my race and my socially-accepted gender identity. A hundred years ago, I would have just thought I was – normal. Natural. So: progress. Now I can work to identify the problems in myself, and get better; and that, multiplied by 330 million, is how we can make this into a country and a culture we can all be proud of, from end to end, rather than only in pieces, and with exceptions and excuses. Just like the fights against Trump himself, all of the work we have done and are doing towards being better people in a better world is all good work, and should continue.

But it’s slow work, and as long as it continues unfinished – and resisted and denied by millions and millions of us – there are openings for evil people to exploit. That’s how we got Trump. And it’s how we’ll get the next one. I am hopeful that this current shitshow will swing the pendulum in the correct direction, and our next few years will be better and more productive; but as long as the system stays the same, the pendulum will always keep swinging, and it will swing back this way again: and then we’ll have to do this shit all over again. And considering that Trump is worse than Bush who was (in some ways) worse than Reagan, who was (in many ways but not all) worse than Nixon, I’m afraid of who the next swing will bring us. And I’m also afraid that the swing away from Trump will not go far enough, as Biden did not go far enough, as Obama did not go far enough, as Clinton…actually, Clinton should be in the list of evil swings, because his predecessor, George HW Bush, did an honestly better job of adhering at least to the status quo and therefore not committing evil acts, though neither of them did good things. The worse the bad ones get, the lower our standards become for the “lesser evil” we are willing to accept. And that’s not good.

I’ll tell you right now, the one bright spot I can see in the fact that this administration is only one year through its four-year run is that the horror show going on in front of us, and including too many of us, is far and away the most effective mirror we could ever hold up to our own faces, our own flaws. The worse it gets, the more we recognize how bad we let it get, how deep and how dark the problems are that gave rise to this.

Please. I beg you. Recognize that the first problem is the determination not to fix the real issues, but rather to slap a bandaid on them and pretend that everything is fine. If you think that electing a moderate centrist who will do the same things Biden did – sign new executive orders that rescind Trump’s, pass a different kind of budget – that may have good things in it, as the Inflation Reduction Act did, and all the rest of Biden’s quite real and positive accomplishments – but that does not change any of the underlying structural problems (Just as Obama’s ACA did not solve any of the larger issues with health care in this country, even though it was genuinely good to make insurance more widely available and to end lifetime maximums and denial of coverage due to pre-existing conditions – and I would be much more interested in the Republican congress’s claims to want to fix the problems instead of just extending subsidies that mainly enrich insurance companies if they weren’t currently in a cult enthralled to the guy who released the Great Health Care “Plan”), then I guarantee you that the pendulum will swing back sooner than you like, and maybe go farther than you can stand.

Just imagine, for a moment, President Joe Rogan. Or President Nick Fuentes.

And then think about what we can do to solve the larger problems, and to do it quicker than we currently are.

Here, just so I don’t name all these issues and sound all these warnings and offer absolutely no solutions: the two most important things I have learned in the last decade are the incredible amount of money that gets spent on politics, and the deep ignorance of so much of this country’s populace. The two are linked: because the wealthy who buy politicians are more powerful if the populace is ignorant – and that does include those who buy Democratic politicians, because while they generally don’t have the same sociocultural goals, they sure as fuck benefit from the same economic policies, which is why the Democratic party doesn’t change the basic economic structure of this country, and somehow opposes Bernie Sanders even if the other option is Donald Trump – and the more ignorant the populace is, the more effective the control mechanisms of the wealthy become. So while I don’t ever want to become a politician directly, and while I am not good at taking actual political action myself, I am exceptionally good at one of the other critical solutions to the larger underlying issues: education. I am a damn good teacher, and also a decent content creator. So that’s my task, and I am doing it, and I will continue doing it, to the best of my ability and the limits of my capacity. And that will make things better.

Especially if we can all do the same.

One year down, everybody. Look forward. Keep moving. Don’t give up.

Children in Cages

People arrested for allegedly trying to enter the US illegally wait in cages inside a warehouse in McAllen, Texas. Picture: AP

People arrested for allegedly trying to enter the US illegally wait in cages inside a warehouse in McAllen, Texas. Picture: AP

 

CUSTOMS AND BORDER PATROL VIA REUTERS

 

Did you know we’re keeping children in cages?

 

I actually wrote a different blog yesterday, about how I fear that Trump’s success – or at least the positive things that are happening around him, even if they’re not because of him, like the unemployment rate going down – will encourage a cultural shift towards bullying. But I can’t post that one until I write and post this. Because this is the first thing that needs to be discussed. In fact, we should start every conversation with this until the answer can genuinely be, “No, we’re not; they stopped that.” Walk into Starbucks, and the barrista should say, “Hi, there are children in cages, but can I take your order?” And you should say, “Unnecessary family separation as a deterrent policy is a crime against humanity, and I’ll have a latte.”

So. Because of the attack on the media from Trump and the right (And because the corporate media has been sliding down into the muck for a generation at least), let’s establish facts.

First fact: when you type “children” into the Google search box, the first option is “Children in cages.” This is America. Childish Gambino released that video a month early.

Second fact: is this actually happening? Yes.

Federal officials said Tuesday that since May, they have separated 2,342 children from their families, rendering them unaccompanied minors in the government’s care.

(Source)

 

Third fact: are these children being kept in cages? Here’s a good explanation of the semantic argument.  If I may, the answer is: Yes. They are detention facilities, they do provide for the basic needs of the children, with the exception of the most obvious one: their parents aren’t there. But the essential point is: the children are held in enclosures made of chain-link fencing on concrete floors, and they are not allowed out of those enclosures. They are not able to see or communicate with their parents unless they can wend their way through an enormous bureaucracy.

Fourth fact: The children separated from their parents include infants and toddlers. Being kept in “Tender age shelters.”

 

 

Fifth fact: this is not, despite the administration’s stance, required by law, nor is it the fault of the Democrats. Unless we stop believing in free will. The administration has claimed – I heard White House spokesman Hogan Gidley reference all three of these elements during an interview with NPR – that the separation of families and the detention of children is the result of three things: the Flores Agreement from 1997, the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, and the 2016 decision by the 9th Circuit Court which included accompanied minors in the previous laws regarding unaccompanied minors.

Here’s a good article from PolitiFact about this argument

If I may quote Inigo Montoya: “Lemme ‘splain. No, is too much: lemme sum up.”

The Flores Settlement agreement (Which settled a class-action lawsuit actually going back to the Reagan Administration) says that aliens in the custody of INS (now ICE) who are unaccompanied minors must be held in the “least restrictive setting” possible. Specifically, it says,

“The INS shall place each detained minor in the least restrictive setting appropriate to the minor’s age and special needs, provided that such setting is consistent with its interests to ensure the minor’s timely appearance before the INS and the immigration courts and to protect the minor’s well-being and that of others.”

Source

This means, to the Trump administration, that children can’t be jailed, and if their parents have to be, then the children must be separated from the jailed parents. I’ve seen various sources say that the settlement requires unaccompanied minors be released within 20 days, but I can’t find that passage in the agreement. If you’d like to try, look here.

The 2008 law applies because it says:

Except in the case of exceptional circumstances, any department or agency of the Federal Government that has an unaccompanied alien child in custody shall transfer the custody of such child to the Secretary of Health and Human Services not later than 72 hours after determining that such child is an unaccompanied alien child.

Source

This means that, once the children are separated from their parents (and therefore, according to the Trump administration, they are unaccompanied minors), they cannot be held by either INS, if the parents are being held pending an immigration hearing, nor by the U.S. Marshals, who hold the parents if they are being accused of a federal crime – which, under this administration, they are; that’s the “Zero Tolerance” policy that Jeff Sessions announced in April. Sessions’s memo to the state attorneys general is here,  and the law that he cites, the law against unlawful entry, is here.

Please note that the maximum penalty for a first offense is six months in jail, which makes this crime a misdemeanor. Most adult immigrants, once they reach a hearing, are released with time served.

Finally, the 2016 decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals broadened the Flores Settlement to include accompanied minors, meaning that they, too, had to be held in the least restrictive setting available, and, as with the 1997 settlement, the government had to prioritize release of children in custody to family members over any other solution; the decision says that this was also the case with minors detained with their parents, though it does also make clear that this does not require the government to release the parents in order to provide a custodial parent for the children. It does require, as the Flores Settlement did, that parents be released with their children if they are not a legal or flight risk. 

Text of the Decision

 

So what does all this mean? It means that the Trump administration is arguing that they must uphold the law, and they must do something drastic to reduce the crisis of immigration across the southern U.S. border. They claim that those who cross the border have committed a crime, and therefore they must be prosecuted. If those people brought their minor children with them in the commission of this crime, those children have to be separated from their parents as they cannot be held in a prison with their parents, but must be remanded to the custody of Health and Human Services, as per the Flores Settlement, the 2016 decision by the 9th Circuit, and the 2008 Wilberforce Reauthorization Act. HHS then places those kids into tents and warehouses, wherever they have facilities that meet the standard of the Flores Settlement (Which says that they have to have the basic needs, and also opportunities for exercise, entertainment, education, and contact with their parents. Well.). This, they say, is all required by law, and at various times, various members of the administration from President Trump on down have all claimed that this is the fault of the Democrats: first they claimed that Democrats passed the laws (They didn’t), then they claimed that this has been going on since either the Obama administration or the Clinton administration (Neither is true; both administrations detained unaccompanied minors in similar settings, but neither intentionally separated accompanied minors from their parents and then treated them as unaccompanied minors. Generally they released families. It should also be noted that there were not nearly as many families trying to immigrate with their minor children in the past. Source), and then they claimed that the Democrats could end this any time by passing legislation to change the laws or the policies – their preference, apparently, is for the alteration of the Flores Settlement, so that they can detain children, accompanied and unaccompanied, for as long as necessary. This is also untrue in that the Republicans control all branches of government; it is true that they need Democrat votes to pass a law through the Senate, but the first obstruction to any legislation is and has been the President, who just will not say what he is willing to support; the two bills currently being debated in the House, one more conservative without a path to citizenship for the DACA recipients, one more moderate (but still Republican/conservative) with a path to citizenship (along with limiting legal immigration and funding the Trump border wall) have BOTH got his support, whatever the hell that means.

But please, in this era of lies and exaggeration and political spin, let’s just get down to brass tacks. This policy of family separation is. Fucking. WRONG. It is vile and appalling and inhumane and cruel and everything that this country is not supposed to be. Regardless of whether the parents of those children have committed crimes (and in the case of asylum seekers, some of whom have also reportedly been separated from their children because the asylum seekers stay in the custody of ICE while awaiting their hearings and the children have to be remanded to HHS according to Wilberforce, literally no crime has been committed, as seeking asylum is legal.), the children have not, and the children have rights. They have the right to be with their parents, and they have the right to not be jailed. That doesn’t imply that you put them into chainlink-partition-spaces in tents in Texas; it implies that you find a way to ensure that the parents can be released from custody without violating the laws you are trying to enforce.

Now let’s talk about that. Because there really is an obvious solution here, even though it is one that Trump finds untenable because it makes his base froth at the mouth: he calls it “Catch and Release.” This is the policy that previous administrations have used with most families (Not, as Obama’s Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said, in cases where there might be some doubt as to the child’s familial relationship to the adult; thereby rebutting current DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s argument that children must be separated in all cases because the families have no documentary evidence of familial relationship and therefore ICE has to assume the adults are human traffickers) and with many other immigrants seeking asylum or going through legal processes. You set up a court date, and then you release the people on their own recognizance, with the understanding that they will show up for their court date.

Here’s the thing. This is how our system works. Our Constitution requires the provision of bail that is not excessive, and that everyone receive a fair and speedy trial, and that anyone accused of any crime is innocent until proven guilty. Unlawful entry is a misdemeanor. The maximum fine is $250. Reasonable bail for that crime would be, what, maybe $100? Public intoxication, also a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of 6 months (Varies by state – I’m using Indiana because it came up first on Google) and a fine of a whopping $1000, has a bail around $200-$500, according to the Bail Bonds Network. So I would think that bail for the parents should be something that most of them should have access to, especially if they have friends or family in the U.S. Once bail has been granted, then the question is whether or not the accused will show up for court; President Trump, of course, argues that they won’t, that the illegal immigrants are intending exactly this: showing up with their kids so that if they get caught, they will be released and then they will vanish into the Heart of Darkness inside the U.S. and never be seen again until they get arrested for rape or murder.

But here’s the thing. Immigrants show up. They don’t miss their court dates.

Moreover, studies show that asylum seekers—like many of the thousands of Central American families fleeing violence and arriving to the U.S.—are likely to appear for proceedings, because they have such a strong incentive to avoid returning to persecution. Indeed, as United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) researchers found in 2013, asylum seekers have a natural “inclination towards law-abidingness,” and view making a refugee claim as “a manifestation of faith in legal process.” U.S. research bears this out. A Vera Institute study, from 1997 to 2000, of asylum seekers in expedited removal proceedings found to have credible fear, found that 93 percent with intensive supervision complied with all court proceedings; 84 percent complied with minimal supervision; and 78 percent complied even if simply released without supervision. These compliance rates were so high that Vera concluded that “[a]sylum seekers do not need to be detained to appear…. They also do not seem to need intensive supervision.”

Source

And if that rate doesn’t appeal, there are certainly ways to improve it. Immigrants with legal representation, for instance, attend hearings at an even higher rate. Solutions like allowing immigrants to check in via phone call or smartphone location apps create higher response rates. Even ankle bracelets (like the two that Paul Manafort has to wear ) would allow a tough-on-crime sort of stance, while allowing families to stay together, and reducing the burden on government resources to house all of these people.

In other words: there are alternatives. Even if you accept the claim that the administration is enforcing immigration law, it has to be pointed out that there are also 11 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the U.S., who are not currently being rounded up, separated from their children, and housed in federal lockup. So apparently the Trump administration is actually choosing and prioritizing which laws it enforces to what extent. Which is, indeed, the whole goddamn point of an executive branch. And this executive is choosing to prosecute people accused of first time illegal entry – a misdemeanor with a lesser penalty than some states impose for jaywalking – and therefore choosing, as a matter of intentional, proactive, object-oriented policy, to separate families and put children in cages. This is our government, and our country. It is us, unless we do something about it.

It is fucking wrong. It has to stop. It has to be the first thing we say, and the first thing we act on, in our current opposition to the abuses of our government. And I don’t care if you are a progressive liberal or a libertarian anarchist: this is what you should be talking about. This is what you should be fighting. Call your representative, call the White House, write letters, march, protest, donate, do anything and everything you can. Fight this. Fight it now.

We are keeping children in cages.